Vulnerabilities
Misconfiguration
Compliance
CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2017-12194

Stack-based Buffer Overflow

Published: Mar 14, 2018 | Modified: Nov 21, 2024
CVSS 3.x
9.8
CRITICAL
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS 2.x
10 HIGH
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
5.5 MODERATE
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
Ubuntu
MEDIUM
Vulnerability-free packages from our partners
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo
Additional information
NVDhttps://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-12194
CWEhttps://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/121.html

A flaw was found in the way spice-client processed certain messages sent from the server. An attacker, having control of malicious spice-server, could use this flaw to crash the client or execute arbitrary code with permissions of the user running the client. spice-gtk versions through 0.34 are believed to be vulnerable.

Weakness

A stack-based buffer overflow condition is a condition where the buffer being overwritten is allocated on the stack (i.e., is a local variable or, rarely, a parameter to a function).

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
Spice-gtkSpice-gtk_project*0.34 (including)
SpiceUbuntuartful*
SpiceUbuntubionic*
SpiceUbuntucosmic*
SpiceUbuntudevel*
SpiceUbuntudisco*
SpiceUbuntueoan*
SpiceUbuntuesm-infra-legacy/trusty*
SpiceUbuntuesm-infra/bionic*
SpiceUbuntuesm-infra/focal*
SpiceUbuntufocal*
SpiceUbuntugroovy*
SpiceUbuntuhirsute*
SpiceUbuntuimpish*
SpiceUbuntujammy*
SpiceUbuntukinetic*
SpiceUbuntulunar*
SpiceUbuntumantic*
SpiceUbuntunoble*
SpiceUbuntuoracular*
SpiceUbuntuplucky*
SpiceUbuntuquesting*
SpiceUbuntutrusty*
SpiceUbuntutrusty/esm*
Spice-gtkUbuntuartful*
Spice-gtkUbuntubionic*
Spice-gtkUbuntuesm-apps/bionic*
Spice-gtkUbuntutrusty*
Spice-gtkUbuntuupstream*
Spice-protocolUbuntuesm-infra/xenial*
Spice-protocolUbuntuxenial*

Potential Mitigations

  • Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking.
  • D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND [REF-1334] discusses canary-based detection in detail.
  • Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program’s executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.
  • Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as “rebasing” (for Windows) and “prelinking” (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking.
  • For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].

References

Aqua Security is the largest pure-play cloud native security company, providing customers the freedom to innovate and run their businesses with minimal friction. The Aqua Cloud Native Security Platform provides prevention, detection, and response automation across the entire application lifecycle to secure the build, secure cloud infrastructure and secure running workloads wherever they are deployed.
Copyright © 2026 Aqua Security Software Ltd.   Privacy Policy | Terms of Use